Data
- Date:
- 17-12-2024
- Country:
- USA
- Number:
- 4:23-cv-4437
- Court:
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
- Parties:
- Fundiciones Balaguer, S.A. v. Ferrell-Ross Roll Mfg
Keywords
USAGES AND PRACTICES – PRACTICES ESTABLISHED BETWEEN PARTIES (ART. 9(1) CISG)
RIGHT TO INTEREST (ART. 78 CISG) - APPLICABLE INTEREST RATE - DETERMINED BY APPLICABLE STATUTORY RATE
Abstract
[Draft abstract prepared by Peilin Song and Wu Zhipeng, ZUEL-ZUR School of Law and Economics, Wuhan]
A Spanish seller sold cast iron rolls, intended for use in the food processing industry, to a U.S. buyer. The buyer placed multiple orders, which were duly fulfilled by the seller, but failed to pay the purchase price. The seller initiated legal proceedings against the buyer, claiming, inter alia, breach of contract and seeking compensation for the resulting loss. Although the buyer was duly notified of the claim, it failed to respond or appear in court, leading to a default judgment proceeding.
Procedurally, the court found the default judgment justified, as the seller had submitted sufficient evidence showing that the defendant was properly served with the summons and that all other requirements for entering a default judgment under federal law had been satisfied.
Regarding the applicable law, the court held that the CISG governed the dispute, as both Spain and the United States are Contracting States and the parties had not opted out of the Convention’s application.
The court then addressed whether a contract had been formed. Although the seller did not submit a written contract, it provided a series of invoices corresponding to orders placed by the buyer and duly fulfilled. Specifically, the seller stated that it had fulfilled at least eight orders since January 2021—constituting offer, acceptance, and consideration (i.e., the buyer’s promise to pay). Relying on Art. 9(1) of the CISG, the Court found that a valid contract existed, and that the buyer was bound by the parties’ established practices to pay for the delivered goods.
Additionally, citing Art. 25 of the CISG, the Court found that the buyer’s failure to pay constituted a fundamental breach of contract.
Moreover, the seller was awarded damages pursuant to Art. 74 CISG, along with prejudgment and post-judgment interest at the applicable federal rate.
All other seller's claims regarding unjust enrichment and the appointment of a receiver and/or issuance of a writ of attachment were dismissed.
Fulltext
}}
Source
Original in English:
- available at www.cisg-online.org}}